194
submitted 4 months ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 50 points 4 months ago

She’s the only candidate with access to the existing campaign funds. There’s not enough time to refund them all and donate to a new candidate before early voting ballots go out in eight weeks. If it’s not Harris, they’ll have to be independently wealthy to fund their own campaign in time.

[-] DarkThoughts@fedia.io 22 points 4 months ago

Why is US politics relying so much on campaigning and donations anyway? Not that we don't have the odd politician speaking somewhere physically here either but it is fairly rare in comparison. Most of the whole "get to know" part happens through TV or internet media. The US just seems to make it a weird spectacle, which imo just further reinforces the whole "team" aspects of it and with that the whole two party system.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 27 points 4 months ago

Our news system has no integrity, and is loyal only to money. Ad campaigns are the only option to reach the passively informed with a clear and uncompromised message.

[-] DarkThoughts@fedia.io 6 points 4 months ago

Is there no publicly funded news media / broadcaster? Like the German Tagesschau, or UK's BBC, or the Canadian CBC, etc? Typically there's a higher amount of trust for those, since they are mostly acting independently and the majority of funding coming from the people itself.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 21 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

We have NPR and PBS. They don’t get as much exposure as corporate news. You’ll see posts on Lemmy from both publications often, but this is obviously not the average American’s experience.

[-] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 10 points 4 months ago

There is, unfortunately they're viewed by on of the political parties as being evil liberal propaganda machines, and they very much want to privatize them or just sell all of their content off and shutter them.

[-] barsquid@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago

In 2010, a biased and purchased Supreme Court declared that wealthy people are allowed to spend whatever amounts they want to on propaganda. There's no way to get a word in edgewise.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

To be fair that money can all go to the DNC and get used on "issues" or "support" ads. Officially around 30 million could be used in collaboration with a new campaign committee, but in reality it would all be supporting the nominee.

[-] bostonbananarama@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

Yes, she's the only candidate, but the funds can also go to the DNC or a Super PAC if Biden directs them there.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago

That’s incorrect. Only a few thousand is transferable to a candidate not on the existing ticket. The rest would need to be refunded to donors.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/91-million-question-what-happens-bidens-campaign-money-2024-07-18/

[-] bostonbananarama@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Literally from the article you linked.

But under a more likely scenario, Biden would take advantage of rules that allow unlimited transfers to the candidate's political party. In that case, Biden's Democratic Party could spend the money supporting the party's new candidate.

He can also transfer to a Super PAC.

Edit: In case you don't believe me again.

Biden could also potentially transfer his funds to an independent super PAC if Harris is not on the ticket.

https://www.vox.com/joe-biden/361991/361991biden-campaign-funds-after-drops-out

this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2024
194 points (95.8% liked)

politics

19144 readers
1752 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS